"People come to WN bringing a diverse set of beliefs, based on their education and experiences. If someone arrives at being WN through the Klan or NS, then great! And if someone is NS or Klan, I won't put them down"

"I have already pulled my savings and stocks, increased my ammo cashe for when this prick tries to take away our guns. Everybody needs to prepare now for the civil war this non-christian, muslim piece of crap is going to start trying to be the next martin luther king"

I will confess. I was about to join there and just [Swearinginhere] debunk everysingle letter I could find as "white".

Within a 5 minutes read, I realized this; I swear to my life, I have never ever experienced so mush stupidity and ignorance. Ergo, I couldnt. I get this fear of mass idiosy and I just want to run and fall from a cliff.

Fascism is ahistorical; Its like I am taking to mySkinz and somehow it is talking to me back about its History!

Actually, mySkin tells me that I am being an idiot even looking at it.

Gord wrote:I hear there's a movement in India towards "Aryanism" -- a racist point of view that all Aryans are better than all other races.

SO much for the Aryanism.

[Some] Indians are still Aryans.

Tell me the first colour of the first human was?

B _ _ _ K

"Barak?"

I'm no anthropologist, but I think the wave of peoples who invaded parts of Europe and Asia thousands of years ago, identified as Aryans would have had their genetic uniqueness (if it ever was unique) fairly diluted by now. Therefore, from my understanding of genetics, a good portion of the human population on earth would all contain a small part of their genome. Plenty of other groups without such well-known names invaded those regions many times since. No particular group can claim to be a more direct descendant than any other, after so many generations.

The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

I'm no anthropologist either, but I certainly have empiric knowledge of the augmentation and as you characterize it, dilution, of the gene pool on various continents. And with all due respect to the contributions of sailors everywhere, my benefaction has not been limited to ports of call.

From my understanding of genetics, a lot of opportunity to homogenize our genome has been waisted.

"When you put a toucan on a monkey’s ass, don’t be fooled by the brightly colored plumage, beware of the enormous bill!"

vanderpoel wrote:I'm no anthropologist either, but I certainly have empiric knowledge of the augmentation and as you characterize it, dilution, of the gene pool on various continents. And with all due respect to the contributions of sailors everywhere, my benefaction has not been limited to ports of call.

From my understanding of genetics, a lot of opportunity to homogenize our genome has been waisted.

Wasted?

The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

You don't have to be white to be Aryan. In fact, most Aryans these days probably aren't white. India is full of 'em. And Iran -- in fact, the name "Iran" means "land of Aryans."

I think these names are meaningless after thousands of years. What little we know, indicates that tribes and nationalities moved around quite a bit in those times. Our names for them are usually based on shards of a pottery or weapons found here and there, or vague references in ancient texts. I wouldn't put much stock in trying to trace a pure bloodline so far back in time.

Remember, we're all the same species and brothers under the skin.

The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

fromthehills wrote:The more pure of a bloodline we are, the more inbred we are.

That's what geneticists have told me. The long-held notion that pure bloodlines were somehow better has always been a fallacy, but stubbornly maintained by many people throughout the generations, including the Nazis. Farmers learned a long time ago that there was more money to be made from hybrids than from purebreds, unless they were selling breeding stock.

The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

Absolute BS. All because humans came from Africa does not mean they had the same colour skin as current black africans. There is no genetic evidence for this in the slightest. Sickle cell anemia was only for black populations in modern europe. The paler africans from the north had no problem.

Absolute BS. All because humans came from Africa does not mean they had the same colour skin as current black africans. There is no genetic evidence for this in the slightest. Sickle cell anemia was only for black populations in modern europe. The paler africans from the north had no problem.

I don't think there's any evidence about their skin color either way, but it stands to reason that more pigment fits with more sunlight. The only reason that Caucasians lost their pigment was that it was an advantage where sunlight was in shorter supply.

Pigment is about the most minor of of all possible genetic traits. One of a few genes which switch skin color on or off. It's almost not worth talking about.

The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.